I hear the term "free software" less and less these days
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios
I have been catching up on the happenings with Linux Fest Northwest through news postings and the Linux Action Show videos covering it and no one seems to use the term "free software" in the description of their programs. One example is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgeRx2eAKOY around the 0:53:10 mark.
It is always "open source" and it has sparked a trend I have been seeing more and more lately. Is the term "free software" too confusing in what it means to the average joe? Do they only associate free with price and not open?
I have also been looking around job posting boards and contract work and the majority to almost all the time they say "open source" and rarely "free software" in their requirements or the existing software they use.
On top of that, I have seen various reports of more and more companies opting for "open source" software instead of proprietary ones. In a previous post, some of you said that it doesn't matter if the software is labeled as either open source or free software if it follows a license like the GPL.
Should the free software camp continue to be worried about their monicker used less and less? Or should they just have confidence in the license itself?
It is unfortunate that the word "free" can be ambiguous, but I don't know of any better way to convey the idea of freedom to people. The word "open" certainly doesn't do it.
How about: Ethical Software, or even better, Liberating Software.
After all, Free software is software that liberates users, isn't it?
Liberate:
To set free, as from oppression, confinement, or foreign control.
"Free software is software that liberates users, isn`t it?"
I prefer copyleft to permissive licences, but I always think about copyleft licences as less liberal. And it is good in this case.
I think really reason not only in ambiguity, but in word "freedom", in definition of freedom.
For example, I respect Richard Stallman. But when I hear all this talks about "freedom", blah-blah-blah, I want to pinch my
ears.
Word "freedom" has a very vague definition. Different people can understand it in very different(sometimes even opposite) ways. Because of this, "freedom" is a favorite word of demagogues and propagandists.
In the mouth of rms, "freedom" for software users is very well defined.
Yes, free software well defined. But not most important word, FREEDOM.
Proprietary software developers keep on redefining the words to make them have the opposite meanings of those in the dictionary ("rights" in DRM, "trusted" in "trusted computing", "pirates", etc.). Free software proponents do not do that. Freedom just means what is written in the dictionary:
1. the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint.
2. exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc.
3. the power to determine action without restraint.
4. political or national independence.
5. personal liberty, as opposed to bondage or slavery: a slave who bought his freedom.
To sum up: being free is controlling one's own life. For software, controlling one's own computing, not letting somebody else (the developer) impose restrictions. The notion remains vague but, again, the free software movement believes it has identified four freedoms that are fundamental for a user to be in control of her own computing.
I am another person who tends to agree that the term "free software" is
needlessly vague. That is why I tend to say libre software.
However, the problem is that the word "libre" may not be known to some
listeners, as it's a fairly unused word in everyday English.
Therefore, I believe the simplest solution is simple: just say "freedom
software". It is, after all, just the extension of free software. But
unlike free software there is no ambiguity about cost, and unlike libre
virtually every English listener would understand the meaning. (Even if
they have never considered the issue of software freedom before)
Another trivial benefit of just saying freedom software is that the FSF
doesn't really need to change it's name, as the acronym works equally well.
I understand that the term freedom software is unlikely to take off. And I
know the free software movement (or freedom software movement, as it could
easily become) has much more pressing concerns than a name change. Just an
idea that I wanted to share.
Demagogues and propagandists usually mean the same thing we mean when they use the word freedom except that they are lying when they say it. They count on the fact that the more they say it, the more people may believe what they say and/or that they can diminish the importance & value of the word by using it repeatedly in a manner with little or no significance.
I believe the words "free" and "libre" are worth fighting for and reclaiming. It may get tiresome hearing Stallman do his "not free as in beer" spiel to those of us who have heard it many times before, but I am glad he has the will and conviction to do so, and I thank and support him for doing so. There are always going to be new people hearing his message for the first time and they need us to be there for them with a strong, non-jaded voice, an idealistic voice in a large sea of unethical profiteers.
May you all enjoy free software, free love, AND free beer.
Peace out!
markas
Here's some beautiful "freedom" for you all, THINK!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsL9UL9qbv8
Maybe this could be another free software anthem besides Stallman's a capella classic
Please enjoy this with non flxxh player free software as I now do.
I think it would be better giving free software _any_ name, some kind of "nickname".
It could be really stupid. Take "freest" as an arbitrary example.
Whenever you mention using "only freest programs", everyone will ask "oh what is this?".
When they hear "free software" they don't listen, because they think they already know what this is - gratis, free of charge software, freeware.
I was using "linux" (I thought I did) for many years, browsing blogs and forums, without noticing the difference of free software or open source, even without knowing the name of my operating system!
That was not my fault. Everyone said "linux" and talked about "open source".
Compared to how many people are in my social environment, nearly no one knows about it (and I mean really knows about it), so I think it's an unknown movement.
Sad about this: the percentage of people using free software is slightly higher (for example many collegues at university used libreoffice) but they just don't know about the ideas behind free software and its benefits!
This _is_ a problem.
and less these days
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 22:24:05 +0200 (CEST)
> I think it would be better giving free software _any_ name, some
> kind
> of "nickname".
I find that with SME businesses 'free software' is the best term to
use, sometimes because of the confusion. If they've heard of 'Linux'
and 'open source' its been accompanied by loads of unwanted
incomprehensible techno-babble, 'who wants to know how a program is
made.' That free is about freedom, ethics and how that pans out in
practical business terms are of much more interest to them.
This comes to mind
On 05/08/2013 03:40 AM, t3g wrote:
> It is always "open source" and it has sparked a trend I have been
> seeing more and more lately. Is the term "free software" too
> confusing in what it means to the average joe? Do they only
> associate free with price and not open?
If I'm talking to someone, I normally start using the term "libre
software" and then I might later switch to "free software" and explain
the meaning behind the term, and the differences from freeware.
I have never heard anyone else talk about free software (-as in freedom)
IRL (sadly), so there is no trend where I am.
I'm glad to speak two such languages which makes the difference between free software and free software (Finnish and Esperanto). In English, I talk about libre software or ethical software, describe "Free Software", and if the listener asks "oh you mean GNU, GPL and free software?", I nod a yes. and then explain why I used this term. I can then switch to using Free Software, because the "free of charge" idea hasn't been brought up.
ir.. let's just drop english, it's harmful ;)
I am a member!
I've had a running conversation with the head IT person at the school where I teach about proprietary vs. non-proprietary software (we don't discuss 'free' or even 'open source'). He understands my ethical concerns, doesn't necessarily agree with them and yet is far more accommodating than I expected (or than he probably needed to be). I am able to use Trisquel in my teaching. It's great!
The term 'free' is confusing and, quite frankly, I'm tiring having have to mention 'free as in freedom, not free burgers' (beer isn't age appropriate in my situation). It's absolutely time for FSF to adopt a different euphemism for 'free' as an aid to the conversation.
I believe in the cause, but I also believe it's time to update the message as it's on its way to becoming a lost cause. (Sorry to be blunt).
libredrs
"I hear the term "free software" less and less these days"
That's funny -- Just the other day I was thinking to myself that I hear the term free software more and more these days.
I suppose the language you hear just depends on who you hang out with.
I am a member!
If I'm talking to someone about Free software, I usually call it 'ethical software', or 'liberated software'. It seems to get people curious about what exactly I'm talking about. Then I'll mention 'Free software'.
I guess you could even use the terms 'copyleft software', or even perhaps just 'non-proprietary software' as a curious morsel before talking more completely about Free software.
One of the biggest german IT news sites is "golem.de". They have an own category called "OpenSource" and they post very frequently about "Linux" (some times they really mean the kernel, but most of the time they don't).
They almost never mention free software and in the community, the idea of free software is simply unknown. A few people know about opensource but no one about free software.
You can't run their videos without proprietary flash player.
It's hard to get news about free software in german; a few years ago, a collection of blogs called the ubuntuusers planet was a good source for articles like "the foobar program became free software" or "how to do foobar with free software" and so on, but nowadays, they never post about free software, only about opensource or steam games or spotify....
so at least in the german speaking blogosphere, I experience the decline of the usage of this word.
Don't know why.
Rms still travels through the world holding speeches about free software, I think.
I am a translator!
Actually the golem.de player works with Lightspark:
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/anyone-able-stream-video-without-flash
I know, it's my own post you linked to ;)
Unfortunately, lightspark makes more important sites stop working
Like Quantumgravity, I've been using "Linux" for years, but until just a few weeks ago I did not understand the difference between "open" and "free" software (or GNU vs Linux, for that matter). In fact, I'm still not fully clear about everything; but, I know now that there IS a difference, and I am doing what I can to learn about and to respect that difference. The first thing I did was to drop Ubuntu in favor of Trisquel.
As for the moniker, I would like to see an unambiguous term adopted in place of "free", but unfortunately (like myself until recently), most people won't get it and we will still have to explain what it really means. Even then I think most people won't really care.
I've read that the American Revolution was fought and won by a mere 2-5% of the population (depending on whose doing the estimating). They were fighting for freedom, too. Yes, I'm just an enthusiastic newb, yet I can't help but wonder how much explaining THEY had to do.
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios